PEP 8001: Add a review period and adjust the vote period

[warsaw]

https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-801x-authors-are-you-on-track-for-the-vote-between-nov-16-nov-30/432/27

[dstufft]

I'm personally fine either way.

[warsaw]

IMHO, I think all PEP 801x authors must be unanimous in approving this PR before it can be merged.

[ambv]

Let this be the only schedule slip!

[njsmith]

I think it would be good to check in with @pfmoore and @malemburg here too, since they both explicitly brought up concerns about the voting period on python-committers today.

[warsaw]

@njsmith I posted something to python-committers with a link to this PR.

[vstinner]

Since I am asked to give my opinion, I dislike the idea of postponing the vote result by 2 weeks. Honestly, I don't see the difference between 2 weeks of discussion and 2 weeks of vote. I hope that people will talk while they vote.

I am fine with this PR is the vote or the discussion is reduced to 1 week, so only postpone vote result by 1 week.

As Mariatta wrote, I dislike to have to change the schedule since we agreed on it. By I am fine with one more week.

[vstinner]

I voted -1, but well, you can merge your change anyway if you prefer. I don't want to hold this PR :-p

... So, what about stopping to modify this PEP? :-) #839

[ambv]

@vstinner, please reconsider. We are not asking for your opinion, we are asking for a concession.

You kow full well I am as big a proponent of following the original schedule as you are. But I see that the most important thing we want right now is consensus around the vote. We need it to be considered fair, inclusive, and not rushed by all so that they accept it was legitimate.

We might not see the need for the additional two weeks but some of us do. Please don't push us back into status quo where nobody knows what should happen next.

[vstinner]

Please don't push us back into status quo where nobody knows what should happen next.

The current status is described in the PEP 8001: a vote starts tomorrow :-)

Well, I gave my opinion. Feel free to ignore it.

I voted -1, but well, you can merge your change anyway if you prefer. I don't want to hold this PR :-p

[brettcannon]

Steve's out on vacation so don't count on him placing a vote. @vstinner has now said twice that his opinion can be ignored, so I would consider his "Changes Requested" as really meaning "begrudgingly accepted".

[ambv]

Victor removed his red X :-)

[brettcannon]

I say accept the postponement and say changes to this PEP are only possible up until November 23rd (IOW no more postponement as it's becoming very inconvenient for those of us trying to drive this forward to constantly have to shift these details).

[brettcannon]

(Although I would rather we mark this as final now since the delay in vote should alleviate any worries about immutable votes)

[pfmoore]

think it would be good to check in with @pfmoore and @malemburg here too, since they both explicitly brought up concerns about the voting period on python-committers today.

Thanks for the ping - PR notifications don't say what the change is, so I'd have missed this otherwise.

I'm OK with this change, but to be clear I wouldn't have objected if things had stayed as they were. I have reservations, sure, but someone will always have reservations (for example, @vstinner isn't particularly happy with this new version of the PEP). We shouldn't keep trying to please everyone - but we also should be prepared for people expressing their concerns without it triggering another round of changes... My main preference is that we stop changing things, and give people a chance to start thinking about proposals without trying to keep up with what's changing as well.

So whatever we do, can we then mark this PEP as final, and stop changing the process and just get on with it?

[ambv]

Thank you everybody involved!

I'm sorry @zooba and @jackjansen for not waiting for your +1s 🙍🏻‍♂️ I wish we could have waited longer but we need to announce the new dates.

[warsaw]

Thanks @ambv!

[jackjansen]

For the record: I'm fine either way. (And I didn't react earlier because the request-for-review ended up in a very large folder full of GitHub notifications).